Dear Editor,
From its inception, electoral democracy has always been based upon the will of the majority. So it has been for centuries and so it will be for eons. Societies in which this system obtains, have always accepted this reality. Today, they constitute what is now regarded as the free world. Democracy is the name of the game. The will of the majority is its most quintessential rule. Those who subscribe to the game are bound by and always bind themselves to that rule.
In some countries, the political systems have been altered to suit the needs and peculiarities of those societies. As a result, there are occasions when a majority vote does not yield Government. For example, five Presidents of the United States of America were elected and allowed to govern, though not winning the popular vote. However, those are the rules by which they agreed to play. When the results come, they do not and cannot quarrel with those rules. In such an instance, it means more people did not vote for the Govern-ment than those who voted for the government. Yet, you don’t once hear about “half the country being left behind”.
Political parties from all over the world have drawn their core support from particular constituencies that constitute formidable segments of the demography in those societies, be it class, religion, sects, tribe, caste, ethnicity, race, ideology, etc. So, every time one political party wins an election, its constituency wins and the other constituencies that do not win must accept defeat. These are the rules of the game. However, not for one moment, does this mean that a government so elected, must focus only on its own constituency. It must govern for all. Sagacious politicians, who lose, would normally begin to work to win the next elections. These are also the rules of the game.
What is absolutely prohibited is when one party loses, that party fraudulently uses the state apparatus and public funds to project false results, in order not to give up government and worse yet, refuses to give up government, when those fraudulent results attempts are subverted by clamouring to “share the government” with the winner, on the basis that their constituency would be left behind. If this is ever allowed to prevail, then it will be the end of modern electoral democracy as we know it. If President Donald Trump loses the next election, will he refuse to give up power and demand that the Democrats share government with him because if not, the Republicans, constituting half of the population of the United States, would be “left behind”? Just imagine for one moment this horrendous occurrence replicating itself across the globe. It will sound the death knell of democracy and the birth and glory of tyranny.
This is the tragic narrative of those who have lost the 2nd March 2020 elections in Guyana. The free world will never countenance it. The PPP lost the 2015 elections by just over 4,000 votes. The APNU+AFC lost the 2020 elections by over 15,000 votes, by nearly four times more votes than the PPP lost by in 2015. The PPP, in the traditions of democracy, gave up government. The PPP, from its birth, have always commanded the electoral support of over 50% of the population. That reality has not changed. To those who speak about Indian domination, I say that, currently, the Indians constitute a mere 39% of the population and the Africans extremly close behind. Therefore, it is not about Indians and Africans. It is about leadership, policies and programmes. Those are the foundation pillars Dr. Cheddi Jagan built and left in the PPP. Nothing stops the other political parties from emulating the Father of the Nation.
Their narratives will never succeed. The quicker they understand that, the better.
Yours faithfully,
Anil Nandlall
